The duplicity of Australian diplomacy

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-29/cluster-bomb-legislation-flawed/2816512

As mentioned the urgency of the situation is two-fold.

In two weeks, from November 14-25, a regressive cluster bomb protocol (Protocol VI) is on the table at the Fourth Review Conference to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. Surprise, surprise Australia expressed its support of Protocol VI at a recent disarmament conference in New York.

If implemented the protocol would only ban cluster bombs produced before 1980, those that are already more than 30 years old, of questionable military value and ready for redundancy. Alarmingly it would allow a transition period of 12 years and non-government organisations have said a 15-20 year time frame is more likely once further negotiations are considered. In effect this means those weapons used in Lebanon, Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan and the ongoing devastation they caused would be deemed acceptable. It is hard to see that this protocol benefits anyone but the major users, producers and stockpilers, namely the US, Israel, China, Russia, Pakistan and India.

In complete disregard for the milestone already reached in international humanitarian law, with 111 signatories signalling their commitment to a complete ban on cluster bombs, this protocol threatens to take the world a significant leap backwards in addressing the unacceptable harm clusters cause to civilians. And acting as Friend of the Chair, Australia is at the helm of facilitating this retrograde text.

Australia needs to decide which role it wants to play on the world stage – a leader in the abolition of indiscriminate legacy weapons or a Janus-faced state in contempt of international humanitarian law. The fourth review conference will be a telling time, when true colours will be revealed and the Australian public will see which side of Two-Face prevails.